12306 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 33 / Friday, February 16, 2024 / Notices 

IV. Request for Comments 

We are soliciting public comments to 

permit the Department/Bureau to: (a) 

Evaluate whether the proposed 

information collection is necessary for 

the proper functions of the Department, 

including whether the information will 

have practical utility; (b) Evaluate the 

accuracy of our estimate of the time and 

cost burden for this proposed collection, 

including the validity of the 

methodology and assumptions used; (c) 

Evaluate ways to enhance the quality, 

utility, and clarity of the information to 

be collected; and (d) Minimize the 

reporting burden on those who are to 

respond, including the use of automated 

collection techniques or other forms of 

information technology. 

Comments that you submit in 

response to this notice are a matter of 

public record. We will include, or 

summarize, each comment in our 

request to OMB to approve this ICR. 

Before including your address, phone 

number, email address, or other 

personal identifying information in your 

comment, you should be aware that 

your entire comment—including your 

personal identifying information—may 

be made publicly available at any time. 

While you may ask us in your comment 

to withhold your personal identifying 

information from public review, we 

cannot guarantee that we will be able to 

do so. 

Sheleen Dumas, 

Department PRA Clearance Officer, Office of 

the Under Secretary for Economic Affairs, 

Commerce Department. 

[FR Doc. 2024–03207 Filed 2–15–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–07–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

Bureau of Industry and Security 

Agency Information Collection 

Activities; Submission to the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) for 

Review and Approval; Comment 

Request; Offsets in Military Exports 

AGENCY: Bureau of Industry and 

Security, Commerce. 

ACTION: Notice of information collection, 

request for comment. 

SUMMARY: The Department of 

Commerce, in accordance with the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

(PRA), invites the general public and 

other Federal agencies to comment on 

proposed, and continuing information 

collections, which helps us assess the 

impact of our information collection 

requirements and minimize the public’s 

reporting burden. The purpose of this 

notice is to allow for 60 days of public 

comment preceding submission of the 

collection to OMB. 

DATES: To ensure consideration, 

comments regarding this proposed 

information collection must be received 

on or before April 16, 2024. 

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are 

invited to submit comments by email to 

Mark Crace, IC Liaison, Bureau of 

Industry and Security, at mark.crace@

bis.doc.gov or to PRAcomments@

doc.gov). Please reference OMB Control 

Number 0694–0084 in the subject line of 

your comments. Do not submit 

Confidential Business Information or 

otherwise sensitive or protected 

information. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Requests for additional information or 

specific questions related to collection 

activities should be directed to Mark 

Crace, IC Liaison, Bureau of Industry 

and Security, phone 202–482–8093 or 

by email at mark.crace@bis.doc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Abstract 

This collection of information is 

required by the Defense Production Act 

(DPA). The DPA requires U.S. firms to 

furnish information to the Department 

of Commerce regarding offset 

agreements exceeding $5,000,000 in 

value associated with sales of weapon 

systems or defense-related items to 

foreign countries or foreign firms. 

Offsets are industrial or commercial 

compensation practices required as a 

condition of purchase in either 

government-to-government or 

commercial sales of defense articles 

and/or defense services as defined by 

the Arms Export Control Act and the 

International Traffic in Arms 

Regulations. Such offsets are required 

by most major trading partners when 

purchasing U.S. military equipment or 

defense related items. 

II. Method of Collection 

Electronic or on paper. 

III. Data 

OMB Control Number: 0694–0084. 

Form Number(s): 0694–0084. 

Type of Review: Regular submission, 

extension of a current information 

collection. 

Affected Public: Business or other forprofit organizations. 

Estimated Number of Respondents: 

30. 

Estimated Time per Response: 12 

hours. 

Estimated Total Annual Burden 

Hours: 360. 

Estimated Total Annual Cost to 

Public: 9,000. 

Respondent’s Obligation: Mandatory. 

Legal Authority: Defense Production 

Act of 1950, Section 309. 

IV. Request for Comments 

We are soliciting public comments to 

permit the Department/Bureau to: (a) 

Evaluate whether the proposed 

information collection is necessary for 

the proper functions of the Department, 

including whether the information will 

have practical utility; (b) Evaluate the 

accuracy of our estimate of the time and 

cost burden for this proposed collection, 

including the validity of the 

methodology and assumptions used; (c) 

Evaluate ways to enhance the quality, 

utility, and clarity of the information to 

be collected; and (d) Minimize the 

reporting burden on those who are to 

respond, including the use of automated 

collection techniques or other forms of 

information technology. 

Comments that you submit in 

response to this notice are a matter of 

public record. We will include or 

summarize each comment in our request 

to OMB to approve this ICR. Before 

including your address, phone number, 

email address, or other personal 

identifying information in your 

comment, you should be aware that 

your entire comment—including your 

personal identifying information—may 

be made publicly available at any time. 

While you may ask us in your comment 

to withhold your personal identifying 

information from public review, we 

cannot guarantee that we will be able to 

do so. 

Sheleen Dumas, 

Department PRA Clearance Officer, Office of 

the Under Secretary for Economic Affairs, 

Commerce Department. 

[FR Doc. 2024–03303 Filed 2–15–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–33–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

[RTID 0648–XD539] 

Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to 

Specified Activities; Taking Marine 

Mammals Incidental to the Lutak Dock 

Replacement Project, Haines, Alaska 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Notice; issuance of an incidental 

harassment authorization. 

SUMMARY: In accordance with the 

regulations implementing the Marine 

Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) as 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 33 / Friday, February 16, 2024 / Notices 12307 

amended, notification is hereby given 

that NMFS has issued an incidental 

harassment authorization (IHA) to 

Haines Borough to incidentally harass 

marine mammals during construction 

activities associated with a Lutak Dock 

Replacement project in Haines, Alaska. 

DATES: This authorization is effective 

from June 1, 2024, through May 31, 

2025. 

ADDRESSES: Electronic copies of the 

application and supporting documents, 

as well as a list of the references cited 

in this document, may be obtained 

online at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.

gov/national/marine-mammalprotection/incidental-takeauthorizations-construction-activities. 

In case of problems accessing these 

documents, please call the contact listed 

below. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Craig Cockrell, Office of Protected 

Resources, NMFS, (301) 427–8401. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

The MMPA prohibits the ‘‘take’’ of 

marine mammals, with certain 

exceptions. Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and 

(D) of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et 

seq.) direct the Secretary of Commerce 

(as delegated to NMFS) to allow, upon 

request, the incidental, but not 

intentional, taking of small numbers of 

marine mammals by U.S. citizens who 

engage in a specified activity (other than 

commercial fishing) within a specified 

geographical region if certain findings 

are made and either regulations are 

proposed or, if the taking is limited to 

harassment, a notice of a proposed IHA 

is provided to the public for review. 

Authorization for incidental takings 

shall be granted if NMFS finds that the 

taking will have a negligible impact on 

the species or stock(s) and will not have 

an unmitigable adverse impact on the 

availability of the species or stock(s) for 

taking for subsistence uses (where 

relevant). Further, NMFS must prescribe 

the permissible methods of taking and 

other ‘‘means of effecting the least 

practicable adverse impact’’ on the 

affected species or stocks and their 

habitat, paying particular attention to 

rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of 

similar significance, and on the 

availability of the species or stocks for 

taking for certain subsistence uses 

(referred to in shorthand as 

‘‘mitigation’’); and requirements 

pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring 

and reporting of the takings are set forth. 

The definitions of all applicable MMPA 

statutory terms cited above are included 

in the relevant sections below. 

Summary of Request 

On July 10, 2023, NMFS received a 

request from Haines Borough for an IHA 

to take marine mammals incidental to 

pile driving involving impact, vibratory, 

and down-the-hole (DTH) drilling to 

replace the Lutak Dock. Following 

NMFS’ review of the application, 

Haines Borough submitted a revised 

version on October 11, 2023. The 

application was deemed adequate and 

complete on October 16, 2023. 

Haines Borough’s request was for take 

of six species of marine mammals by 

Level B harassment and, for a subset of 

three of these species, Level A 

harassment. Neither Haines Borough nor 

NMFS expect serious injury or mortality 

to result from this activity and, 

therefore, an IHA is appropriate. 

Description of Activity 

Haines Borough will encapsulate the 

existing Lutak Dock structure with a 

new dock structure of similar design. Inwater construction activities associated 

with the project will include impact pile 

driving, vibratory pile driving and 

removal, and DTH installation. Pile 

removal will consist of 24 16-inch (in) 

steel pipe piles (41 centimeters (cm)) 

that make up the 4 mooring dolphins 

and 1 24-in (61-cm) steel guide pile. A 

template frame will then be welded to 

42 36-in (91-cm) temporary piles that 

are capable of holding 10 permanent 

piles in each section. The template 

frame will be used to position the 180 

42-in (107-cm) permanent piles across 

the length of the dock. Up to 10 

permanent piles will be set at a time, 

before moving the template to the next 

position to install the next 10 

permanent piles. A permanent 55.5-in 

(140-cm) sheet pile wall will be 

installed and attached to the permanent 

piles to make up the new dock return 

walls. It is expected to take up to 234 

non-consecutive days to complete the 

pile driving and removal activities. 

A detailed description of the planned 

construction project is provided in the 

Federal Register notice for the proposed 

IHA (88 FR 78310, November 15, 2023). 

Since that time, no changes have been 

made to the planned activities. 

Therefore, a detailed description is not 

provided here. Please refer to that 

Federal Register notice for the 

description of the specific activity. 

Comments and Responses 

A notice of NMFS’ proposal to issue 

an IHA to Haines Borough was 

published in the Federal Register on 

November 15, 2023 (88 FR 78310). That 

notice described, in detail, Haines 

Borough’s activity, the marine mammal 

species that may be affected by the 

activity, and the anticipated effects on 

marine mammals. In that notice, we 

requested public input on the request 

for authorization described therein, our 

analyses, the proposed authorization, 

and any other aspect of the notice of 

proposed IHA, and requested that 

interested persons submit relevant 

information, suggestions, and 

comments. 

During the 30-day public comment 

period, NMFS did not receive any 

public comments. 

Changes From the Proposed IHA to 

Final IHA 

In table 7 of the proposed IHA 

Federal Register notice (88 FR 78310, 

November 15, 2023) Level A and Level 

B harassment zones for impact 

installation of 42-in. piles were 

incorrect. These values have been 

corrected in table 6 of this notice. Take 

estimates and mitigation measures were 

considered using the correct source 

level and harassment zones and thus 

remain unchanged in this notice. 

Description of Marine Mammals in the 

Area of Specified Activities 

Sections 3 and 4 of the application 

summarize available information 

regarding status and trends, distribution 

and habitat preferences, and behavior 

and life history of the potentially 

affected species. NMFS fully considered 

all of this information, and we refer the 

reader to these descriptions, instead of 

reprinting the information. Additional 

information regarding population trends 

and threats may be found in NMFS’ 

Stock Assessment Reports (SARs; 

https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/ 

national/marine-mammal-protection/ 

marine-mammal-stock-assessments) 

and more general information about 

these species (e.g., physical and 

behavioral descriptions) may be found 

on NMFS’ website (https://www.

fisheries.noaa.gov/find-species). 

Table 1 lists all species or stocks for 

which take is expected and authorized 

for this activity, and summarizes 

information related to the population or 

stock, including regulatory status under 

the MMPA and Endangered Species Act 

(ESA) and potential biological removal 

(PBR), where known. PBR is defined by 

the MMPA as the maximum number of 

animals, not including natural 

mortalities, that may be removed from a 

marine mammal stock while allowing 

that stock to reach or maintain its 

optimum sustainable population (as 

described in NMFS’ SARs). While no 

serious injury or mortality is anticipated 

or authorized here, PBR and annual 

serious injury and mortality from 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
12308 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 33 / Friday, February 16, 2024 / Notices 

anthropogenic sources are included here 

as gross indicators of the status of the 

species or stocks and other threats. 

Marine mammal abundance estimates 

presented in this document represent 

the total number of individuals that 

make up a given stock or the total 

number estimated within a particular 

study or survey area. NMFS’ stock 

abundance estimates for most species 

represent the total estimate of 

individuals within the geographic area, 

if known, that comprises that stock. For 

some species, this geographic area may 

extend beyond U.S. waters. All managed 

stocks in this region are assessed in 

NMFS’ Alaska SARs (Young et al., 

2023). All values presented in table 1 

are the most recent available at the time 

of publication and are available online 

at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/ 

national/marine-mammal-protection/ 

marine-mammal-stock-assessments. 

TABLE 1—SPECIES LIKELY IMPACTED BY THE SPECIFIED ACTIVITIES 1

Common name Scientific name Stock 

ESA/ 

MMPA 

status; 

strategic 

(Y/N) 2

Stock abundance 

(CV, Nmin, most recent 

abundance survey) 3

PBR Annual 

M/SI 4

Order Artiodactyla—Infraorder Cetacea—Mysticeti (baleen whales) 

Family Balaenopteridae 

(rorquals): 

Humpback whale .............. Megaptera novaeangliae ........ Hawai1i .................................... -,-, N 11,278 (0.56, 7,265, 2020) .... 127 27.09 

Mexico-North Pacific .............. T, D, Y N/A (N/A, N/A, 2006) ............. UND 0.57 

Odontoceti (toothed whales, dolphins, and porpoises) 

Family Delphinidae: 

Killer whale ....................... Orcinus orca ........................... Eastern North Pacific Alaska 

Resident.

-, -, N 1,920 (N/A, 1,920, 2019) ....... 19 1.3 

Eastern Northern Pacific 

Northern Resident.

-, -, N 302 (N/A, 302, 2018) ............. 2.2 0.2 

West Coast Transient ............ -, -, N 349 (N/A, 349, 2018) ............. 3.5 0.4 

Family Phocoenidae (porpoises): 

Harbor porpoise ............... Phocoena phocoena .............. Northern Southeast Alaska Inland Waters.-, -, N 1,619 (0.26, 1,250, 2019) ...... 13 5.6 

Dall’s Porpoise ................. Phocoenoides dalli ................. Alaska ..................................... -, -, N UND (UND, UND, 2015) ........ UND 37 

Order Carnivora—Pinnipedia 

Family Otariidae (eared seals 

and sea lions): 

Steller sea lion ................. Eumetopias jubatus ................ Eastern DPS5 ........................ -, -, N 43,201 (N/A, 43,201, 2017) ... 2,592 112 

Western DPS ......................... E, D, Y 52,932 (N/A, 52,932, 2019) ... 318 254 

Family Phocidae (earless 

seals): 

Harbor Seal ...................... Phoca vitulina ......................... Lynn Canal/Stephens Passage.-, -, N 13,388 (N/A, 11,867, 2016) ... 214 50 

1 Information on the classification of marine mammal species can be found on the web page for The Society for Marine Mammalogy’s Committee on Taxonomy 

(https://www.marinemammalscience.org/science-and-publications/list-marine-mammal-species-subspecies/; Committee on Taxonomy (2022)). 2ESA status: Endangered (E), Threatened (T)/MMPA status: Depleted (D). A dash (-) indicates that the species is not listed under the ESA or designated as depleted under the MMPA. Under the MMPA, a strategic stock is one for which the level of direct human-caused mortality exceeds PBR or which is determined to be 

declining and likely to be listed under the ESA within the foreseeable future. Any species or stock listed under the ESA is automatically designated under the MMPA 

as depleted and as a strategic stock. 3 NMFS marine mammal stock assessment reports online at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessmentreports/. CV is coefficient of variation; Nmin is the minimum estimate of stock abundance. In some cases, CV is not applicable. 4These values, found in NMFS’s SARs, represent annual levels of human-caused mortality plus serious injury from all sources combined (e.g., commercial fisheries, vessel strike). Annual M/SI often cannot be determined precisely and is in some cases presented as a minimum value or range. A CV associated with estimated mortality due to commercial fisheries is presented in some cases. 5 Distinct Population Segment (DPS). 

A detailed description of the species 

likely to be affected by the Lutak Dock 

Replacement project, including brief 

introductions to the species and 

relevant stocks as well as available 

information regarding population trends 

and threats, and information regarding 

local occurrence, were provided in the 

Federal Register notice for the proposed 

IHA (88 FR 78310, November 15, 2023); 

since that time, we are not aware of any 

changes in the status of these species 

and stocks; therefore, detailed 

descriptions are not provided here. 

Please refer to that Federal Register 

notice for these descriptions. Please also 

refer to NMFS’ website (https://www.

fisheries.noaa.gov/find-species) for 

generalized species accounts. 

Marine Mammal Hearing 

Hearing is the most important sensory 

modality for marine mammals 

underwater, and exposure to 

anthropogenic sound can have 

deleterious effects. To appropriately 

assess the potential effects of exposure 

to sound, it is necessary to understand 

the frequency ranges marine mammals 

are able to hear. Not all marine mammal 

species have equal hearing capabilities 

(e.g., Richardson et al., 1995; Wartzok 

and Ketten, 1999; Au and Hastings, 

2008). To reflect this, Southall et al. 

(2007, 2019) recommended that marine 

mammals be divided into hearing 

groups based on directly measured 

(behavioral or auditory evoked potential 

techniques) or estimated hearing ranges 

(behavioral response data, anatomical 

modeling, etc.). Note that no direct 

measurements of hearing ability have 

been successfully completed for 

mysticetes (i.e., low-frequency 

cetaceans). Subsequently, NMFS (2018) 

described generalized hearing ranges for 

these marine mammal hearing groups. 

Generalized hearing ranges were chosen 

based on the approximately 65-dB 

threshold from the normalized 

composite audiograms, with the 

exception for lower limits for lowfrequency cetaceans where the lower 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1

I I I I 

I I I I 
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 33 / Friday, February 16, 2024 / Notices 12309 

bound was deemed to be biologically 

implausible and the lower bound from 

Southall et al. (2007) retained. Marine 

mammal hearing groups and their 

associated hearing ranges are provided 

in table 2. 

TABLE 2—MARINE MAMMAL HEARING GROUPS

[NMFS, 2018] 

Hearing group Generalized hearing 

range * 

Low-frequency (LF) cetaceans (baleen whales) ......................................................................................................................... 7 Hz to 35 kHz 

Mid-frequency (MF) cetaceans (dolphins, toothed whales, beaked whales, bottlenose whales) .............................................. 150 Hz to 160 kHz 

High-frequency (HF) cetaceans (true porpoises, Kogia, river dolphins, Cephalorhynchid, Lagenorhynchus cruciger & L. 

australis).

275 Hz to 160 kHz 

Phocid pinnipeds (PW) (underwater) (true seals) ....................................................................................................................... 50 Hz to 86 kHz 

Otariid pinnipeds (OW) (underwater) (sea lions and fur seals) .................................................................................................. 60 Hz to 39 kHz 

* Represents the generalized hearing range for the entire group as a composite (i.e., all species within the group), where individual species’ 

hearing ranges are typically not as broad. Generalized hearing range chosen based on ∼65 dB threshold from normalized composite audiogram, 

with the exception for lower limits for LF cetaceans (Southall et al., 2007) and PW pinniped (approximation). 

The pinniped functional hearing 

group was modified from Southall et al. 

(2007) on the basis of data indicating 

that phocid species have consistently 

demonstrated an extended frequency 

range of hearing compared to otariids, 

especially in the higher frequency range 

(Hemila ̈ et al., 2006; Kastelein et al., 

2009; Reichmuth and Holt, 2013). 

For more detail concerning these 

groups and associated frequency ranges, 

please see NMFS (2018) for a review of 

available information. 

Effects of Specified Activities on Marine 

Mammals and Their Habitat 

The effects of underwater noise from 

Haines Borough’s construction activities 

have the potential to result in behavioral 

harassment of marine mammals in the 

vicinity of the project area. The notice 

of proposed IHA (88 FR 78310, 

November 15, 2023) included a 

discussion of the effects of 

anthropogenic noise on marine 

mammals and the potential effects of 

underwater noise from Haines 

Borough’s construction activities on 

marine mammals and their habitat. That 

information and analysis is incorporated 

by reference into this final IHA 

determination and is not repeated here; 

please refer to the notice of proposed 

IHA (88 FR 78310, November 15, 2023). 

Estimated Take of Marine Mammals 

This section provides an estimate of 

the number of incidental takes 

authorized through the final IHA, which 

will inform both NMFS’ consideration 

of ‘‘small numbers,’’ and the negligible 

impact determinations. 

Harassment is the only type of take 

expected to result from these activities. 

Except with respect to certain activities 

not pertinent here, section 3(18) of the 

MMPA defines ‘‘harassment’’ as any act 

of pursuit, torment, or annoyance, 

which (i) has the potential to injure a 

marine mammal or marine mammal 

stock in the wild (Level A harassment); 

or (ii) has the potential to disturb a 

marine mammal or marine mammal 

stock in the wild by causing disruption 

of behavioral patterns, including, but 

not limited to, migration, breathing, 

nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering 

(Level B harassment). 

Authorized takes would primarily be 

by Level B harassment, as use of the 

construction equipment (i.e., pile 

driving) has the potential to result in 

disruption of behavioral patterns for 

individual marine mammals. There is 

also some potential for auditory injury 

(Level A harassment) to result, primarily 

for high frequency cetaceans and 

phocids, because predicted auditory 

injury zones are larger and beyond 

Haines Borough’s capability to 

reasonably monitor. Auditory injury is 

unlikely to occur for other species 

groups, based on the combination of 

expected occurrence and monitoring 

capabilities relative to estimated Level 

A harassment zone sizes. The mitigation 

and monitoring measures are expected 

to minimize the severity of the taking to 

the extent practicable. 

As described previously, no serious 

injury or mortality is anticipated or 

authorized for this activity. Below we 

describe how the take numbers are 

estimated. 

For acoustic impacts, generally 

speaking, we estimate take by 

considering: (1) acoustic thresholds 

above which NMFS believes the best 

available science indicates marine 

mammals will be behaviorally harassed 

or incur some degree of permanent 

hearing impairment; (2) the area or 

volume of water that will be ensonified 

above these levels in a day; (3) the 

density or occurrence of marine 

mammals within these ensonified areas; 

and, (4) the number of days of activities. 

We note that while these factors can 

contribute to a basic calculation to 

provide an initial prediction of potential 

takes, additional information that can 

qualitatively inform take estimates is 

also sometimes available (e.g., previous 

monitoring results or average group 

size). Below, we describe the factors 

considered here in more detail and 

present the take estimates. 

Acoustic Thresholds 

NMFS recommends the use of 

acoustic thresholds that identify the 

received level of underwater sound 

above which exposed marine mammals 

would be reasonably expected to be 

behaviorally harassed (equated to Level 

B harassment) or to incur permanent 

threshold shift (PTS) of some degree 

(equated to Level A harassment). 

Level B Harassment—Though 

significantly driven by received level, 

the onset of behavioral disturbance from 

anthropogenic noise exposure is also 

informed to varying degrees by other 

factors related to the source or exposure 

context (e.g., frequency, predictability, 

duty cycle, duration of the exposure, 

signal-to-noise ratio, distance to the 

source), the environment (e.g., 

bathymetry, other noises in the area, 

predators in the area), and the receiving 

animals (hearing, motivation, 

experience, demography, life stage, 

depth) and can be difficult to predict 

(e.g., Southall et al., 2007, Southall et 

al., 2021, Ellison et al., 2012). Based on 

what the available science indicates and 

the practical need to use a threshold 

based on a metric that is both 

predictable and measurable for most 

activities, NMFS typically uses a 

generalized acoustic threshold based on 

received level to estimate the onset of 

behavioral harassment. NMFS generally 

predicts that marine mammals are likely 

to be behaviorally harassed in a manner 

considered to be Level B harassment 

when exposed to underwater 

anthropogenic noise above root-meansquared pressure received levels (RMS 

SPL) of 120 dB (referenced to 1 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
12310 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 33 / Friday, February 16, 2024 / Notices 

micropascal (re 1 mPa)) for continuous 

(e.g., vibratory pile driving, drilling) and 

above RMS SPL 160 dB re 1 mPa for nonexplosive impulsive (e.g., seismic 

airguns) or intermittent (e.g., scientific 

sonar) sources. Generally speaking, 

Level B harassment take estimates based 

on these behavioral harassment 

thresholds are expected to include any 

likely takes by temporary threshold shift 

(TTS) as, in most cases, the likelihood 

of TTS occurs at distances from the 

source less than those at which 

behavioral harassment is likely. TTS of 

a sufficient degree can manifest as 

behavioral harassment, as reduced 

hearing sensitivity and the potential 

reduced opportunities to detect 

important signals (conspecific 

communication, predators, prey) may 

result in changes in behavior patterns 

that would not otherwise occur. 

Haines Borough’s activity includes 

the use of continuous (vibratory pile 

driving) and impulsive (impact pile 

driving) sources, and therefore the RMS 

SPL thresholds of 120- and 160-dB re 1 

mPa are applicable. DTH systems have 

both continuous and intermittent 

(impulsive) components as discussed in 

the proposed IHA Federal Register 

notice (88 FR 78310, November 15, 

2023) in the Description of Sound 

Sources section. When evaluating Level 

B harassment, NMFS recommends 

treating DTH as a continuous source and 

applying the RMS SPL thresholds of 

120-dB re 1 mPa. 

Level A harassment—NMFS’ 

Technical Guidance for Assessing the 

Effects of Anthropogenic Sound on 

Marine Mammal Hearing (Version 2.0 of 

Technical Guidance, 2018) identifies 

dual criteria to assess auditory injury 

(Level A harassment) to five different 

marine mammal groups (based on 

hearing sensitivity) as a result of 

exposure to noise from two different 

types of sources (impulsive or nonimpulsive). The Haines Borough’s 

construction includes the use of 

impulsive (impact pile driving) and 

non-impulsive (vibratory pile driving) 

sources. As described above, DTH 

includes both impulsive and nonimpulsive characteristics. When 

evaluating Level A harassment, NMFS 

recommends treating DTH as an 

impulsive source. 

These thresholds are provided in the 

table below. The references, analysis, 

and methodology used in the 

development of the thresholds are 

described in NMFS’ 2018 Technical 

Guidance, which may be accessed at: 

https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/ 

national/marine-mammal-protection/ 

marine-mammal-acoustic-technicalguidance. 

TABLE 3—THRESHOLDS IDENTIFYING THE ONSET OF PERMANENT THRESHOLD SHIFT

Hearing group 

PTS onset acoustic thresholds * 

(received level) 

Impulsive Non-impulsive 

Low-Frequency (LF) Cetaceans ...................................... Cell 1: Lpk,flat: 219 dB; LE,LF,24h: 183 dB ......................... Cell 2: LE,LF,24h: 199 dB. 

Mid-Frequency (MF) Cetaceans ...................................... Cell 3: Lpk,flat: 230 dB; LE,MF,24h: 185 dB ........................ Cell 4: LE,MF,24h: 198 dB. 

High-Frequency (HF) Cetaceans ..................................... Cell 5: Lpk,flat: 202 dB; LE,HF,24h: 155 dB ........................ Cell 6: LE,HF,24h: 173 dB. 

Phocid Pinnipeds (PW) (Underwater) ............................. Cell 7: Lpk,flat: 218 dB; LE,PW,24h: 185 dB ....................... Cell 8: LE,PW,24h: 201 dB. 

Otariid Pinnipeds (OW) (Underwater) ............................. Cell 9: Lpk,flat: 232 dB; LE,OW,24h: 203 dB ....................... Cell 10: LE,OW,24h: 219 dB. 

* Dual metric acoustic thresholds for impulsive sounds: Use whichever results in the largest isopleth for calculating PTS onset. If a non-impulsive sound has the potential of exceeding the peak sound pressure level thresholds associated with impulsive sounds, these thresholds should 

also be considered. 

Note: Peak sound pressure (Lpk) has a reference value of 1 μPa, and cumulative sound exposure level (LE) has a reference value of 1μPa2s. 

In this table, thresholds are abbreviated to reflect American National Standards Institute standards (ANSI 2013). However, peak sound pressure 

is defined by ANSI as incorporating frequency weighting, which is not the intent for this Technical Guidance. Hence, the subscript ‘‘flat’’ is being 

included to indicate peak sound pressure should be flat weighted or unweighted within the generalized hearing range. The subscript associated 

with cumulative sound exposure level thresholds indicates the designated marine mammal auditory weighting function (LF, MF, and HF 

cetaceans, and PW and OW pinnipeds) and that the recommended accumulation period is 24 hours. The cumulative sound exposure level 

thresholds could be exceeded in a multitude of ways (i.e., varying exposure levels and durations, duty cycle). When possible, it is valuable for 

action proponents to indicate the conditions under which these acoustic thresholds will be exceeded. 

Ensonified Area 

Here, we describe operational and 

environmental parameters of the activity 

that are used in estimating the area 

ensonified above the acoustic 

thresholds, including source levels and 

transmission loss coefficient. 

The sound field in the project area is 

the existing background noise plus 

additional construction noise from the 

project. Marine mammals are expected 

to be affected via sound generated by 

the primary components of the project 

(i.e., impact pile driving, vibratory pile 

driving and removal, DTH). The 

maximum (underwater) area ensonified 

above the thresholds for behavioral 

harassment referenced above is 20.86 

kilometers2 (12.96 miles2), and will 

consist of the entire area of Lutak Inlet 

(see Figure 20 in the Haines Borough’s 

application). Additionally, vessel traffic 

and other commercial and industrial 

activities in the project area may 

contribute to elevated background noise 

levels which may mask sounds 

produced by the project. 

Transmission loss (TL) is the decrease 

in acoustic intensity as an acoustic 

pressure wave propagates out from a 

source. TL parameters vary with 

frequency, temperature, sea conditions, 

current, source and receiver depth, 

water depth, water chemistry, and 

bottom composition and topography. 

The general formula for underwater TL 

is: 

TL = B × Log10 (R1/R2) 

Where: 

TL = transmission loss in dB 

B = transmission loss coefficient 

R1 = the distance of the modeled SPL from 

the driven pile, and 

R2 = the distance from the driven pile of the 

initial measurement 

This formula neglects loss due to 

scattering and absorption, which is 

assumed to be zero here. The degree to 

which underwater sound propagates 

away from a sound source is dependent 

on a variety of factors, most notably the 

water bathymetry and presence or 

absence of reflective or absorptive 

conditions including in-water structures 

and sediments. Spherical spreading 

occurs in a perfectly unobstructed (freefield) environment not limited by depth 

or water surface, resulting in a 6-dB 

reduction in sound level for each 

doubling of distance from the source 

(20xlog[range]). Cylindrical spreading 

occurs in an environment in which 

sound propagation is bounded by the 

water surface and sea bottom, resulting 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 33 / Friday, February 16, 2024 / Notices 12311 

in a reduction of 3 dB in sound level for 

each doubling of distance from the 

source (10xlog[range]). A practical 

spreading value of 15 is often used 

under conditions, such as the project 

site, where water increases with depth 

as the receiver moves away from the 

shoreline, resulting in an expected 

propagation environment that will lie 

between spherical and cylindrical 

spreading loss conditions. Practical 

spreading loss is assumed here. 

The intensity of pile driving sounds is 

greatly influenced by factors such as the 

type of piles, hammers, and the physical 

environment in which the activity takes 

place. In order to calculate the distances 

to the Level A harassment and the Level 

B harassment sound thresholds for the 

methods and piles being used in this 

project, the applicant and NMFS used 

acoustic monitoring data from other 

locations to develop proxy source levels 

for the various pile types, sizes and 

methods. The project includes vibratory, 

impact, and DTH pile installation of 

steel pipe and sheet piles and vibratory 

removal of steel pipe piles. Source 

levels for impact installation of 36-in 

steel piles are used as a proxy for 42-in 

steel piles, as 36-in source levels are 

higher than those available for 42-in 

piles. Using these higher values is the 

more conservative approach for 

mitigation measures and take estimate 

calculations. NMFS consulted multiple 

sources to determine valid proxy source 

levels for the impact installation of 

sheet piles, as indicated in table 4. This 

is the best available data for sheet pile 

source levels and is based on 24-in sheet 

piles used for a project in California. 

Source levels for each pile size and 

driving method are presented in table 4. 

TABLE 4—PROXY SOUND SOURCE LEVELS FOR PILE SIZES AND DRIVING METHODS

Pile size Method 

Proxy source level 

Literature source dB RMS re 

1μPa 

dB SEL * re 

1μPa2sec 

dB peak re 

1μPa 

16-in ................................... Vibratory ............................ 161 N/A N/A Navy 2015. 

24-in ................................... Vibratory ............................ 161 N/A N/A Navy 2015. 

36-in ................................... Vibratory ............................ 166 N/A N/A Navy 2015. 

42-in ................................... Vibratory ............................ 170 N/A N/A Illingworth and Rodkin, 2019. 

55.5-in sheet pile ............... Vibratory ............................ 162 N/A N/A Molnar et al. 2020. 

36-in ................................... Impact ................................ 192 184 211 Navy 2015. 

42-in ................................... Impact ................................ 192 184 211 Navy 2015. 

55.5-in sheet pile ............... Impact ................................ 190 180 205 Caltrans 2015. 

42-in ................................... DTH ................................... 174 164 194 NMFS 2022. 

* Sound exposure level (SEL) 

The ensonified area associated with 

Level A harassment is more technically 

challenging to predict due to the need 

to account for a duration component. 

Therefore, NMFS developed an optional 

User Spreadsheet tool to accompany the 

Technical Guidance that can be used to 

relatively simply predict an isopleth 

distance for use in conjunction with 

marine mammal density or occurrence 

to help predict potential takes. We note 

that because of some of the assumptions 

included in the methods underlying this 

optional tool, we anticipate that the 

resulting isopleth estimates are typically 

going to be overestimates of some 

degree, which may result in an 

overestimate of potential take by Level 

A harassment. However, this optional 

tool offers the best way to estimate 

isopleth distances when more 

sophisticated modeling methods are not 

available or practical. For stationary 

sources such as impact or vibratory pile 

driving and removal and DTH, the 

optional User Spreadsheet tool predicts 

the distance at which, if a marine 

mammal remained at that distance for 

the duration of the activity, it will be 

expected to incur PTS. Inputs used in 

the optional User Spreadsheet tool 

(table 5), and the resulting estimated 

isopleths and the calculated Level B 

harassment isopleth (table 6), are 

reported below. For source levels of 

each pile please refer to table 4. 

TABLE 5—USER SPREADSHEET INPUT PARAMETERS USED FOR CALCULATING LEVEL A HARASSMENT ISOPLETHS

Pile size and installation method Spreadsheet tab used 

Weighting factor 

adjustment 

(kHz) 

Number of 

strikes 

per pile 

Number of 

piles 

per day 

Activity 

duration 

(minutes) 

16-in vibratory removal ............................... A.1 Vibratory pile driving .............. 2.5 N/A 4 45 

24-in vibratory removal ............................... A.1 Vibratory pile driving .............. 2.5 N/A 1 45 

36-in vibratory installation (temporary) ....... A.1 Vibratory pile driving .............. 2.5 N/A 4 15 

36-in vibratory removal (temporary) ........... A.1 Vibratory pile driving .............. 2.5 N/A 4 15 

42-in vibratory installation ........................... A.1 Vibratory pile driving .............. 2.5 N/A 4 45 

55-in sheet pile vibratory installation .......... A.1 Vibratory pile driving .............. 2.5 N/A 6 30 

36-in impact installation (temporary) .......... E.1 Impact pile driving .................. 2 900 4 N/A 

42-in impact installation .............................. E.1 Impact pile driving .................. 2 1,500 4 N/A 

55-in sheet pile impact installation ............. E.1 Impact pile driving .................. 2 900 6 N/A 

42-in DTH installation ................................. E.2 DTH systems ......................... 2 324,000 2 N/A 

TABLE 6—CALCULATED LEVEL A AND LEVEL B HARASSMENT ISOPLETHS

Activity 

Level A harassment zone (m) Level B 

harassment 

LF-cetaceans MF-cetaceans HF-cetaceans Phocids Otariids zone (m) 

16-in vibratory removal ............................ 14.2 1.3 21.8 8.6 0.6 5,412 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1

I I I I 

I I I I 
12312 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 33 / Friday, February 16, 2024 / Notices 

TABLE 6—CALCULATED LEVEL A AND LEVEL B HARASSMENT ISOPLETHS—Continued 

Activity 

Level A harassment zone (m) Level B 

harassment 

LF-cetaceans MF-cetaceans HF-cetaceans Phocids Otariids zone (m) 

24-in vibratory removal ............................ 5.6 0.5 8.3 3.4 0.2 

36-in vibratory installation (temporary) .... 14.7 1.3 21.8 8.9 0.6 11,659 

36-in vibratory removal (temporary) ........ 14.7 1.3 21.8 8.9 0.6 

42-in vibratory installation * ...................... 56.6 5.0 83.6 34.4 2.4 21,544 

55-in sheet pile vibratory installation ....... 16.6 1.5 24.5 10.1 0.7 6,310 

36-in impact installation (temporary) ....... 2,734.9 97.3 3,257.7 1,463.6 106.6 1,359 

42-in impact installation ........................... 3,844.5 136.7 4,579.4 2,057.4 149.8 1,359 

55-in sheet pile impact installation .......... 1,939.4 69.0 2,310.1 1,037.9 75.6 1,000 

42-in DTH installation .............................. 4,046.9 143.9 4,820.5 2,165.7 157.7 39,811 

* Harassment zones updated from the proposed IHA. 

Marine Mammal Occurrence 

In this section NMFS provides 

information about the occurrence of 

marine mammals, including density or 

other relevant information which will 

inform the take calculations. 

When available, peer-reviewed 

scientific publications were used to 

estimate marine mammal abundance in 

the project area. Data from monitoring 

reports from previous projects in Lutak 

and Skagway were used. However, 

scientific surveys and resulting data, 

such as population estimates, densities, 

and other quantitative information, are 

lacking for some marine mammal 

populations and most areas of southeast 

Alaska, including Lutak Inlet. Therefore, 

Haines Borough additionally gathered 

qualitative information from discussions 

with knowledgeable local people in the 

Haines area. Assumptions regarding the 

size of expected groups of different 

species, and the frequency of occurrence 

of those groups, were provided by 

Haines Borough on the basis of the 

aforementioned information. NMFS has 

reviewed the available information and 

concurs that these choices are 

reasonable. 

Here we describe how the information 

provided is synthesized to produce a 

quantitative estimate of the take that is 

reasonably likely to occur and is 

authorized. Since reliable densities are 

not available, the take numbers are 

based on the assumed maximum 

number of animals in a group at a given 

time and the occurrence of those groups 

per day multiplied by the duration of 

each activity. Tables for each species are 

presented to show the calculation of 

take during the project. The take 

calculation for this project is: 

Incidental take estimate = number of 

individuals in a group × groups per 

day × days of pile-related activity 

Humpback Whale 

Humpback whale presence in Lutak is 

irregular year-round. From mid-May 

through September whales are assumed 

to occur in groups of two and from 

October to April in groups of one. It is 

expected that in early summer (midMay through July) one group every 2 

days may occur and at all other times of 

the year one group every 10 days will 

occur in the project area (Solstice AK, 

2023; Happywhale, 2023). Therefore, 

using the equation given above, the total 

number of Level B harassment takes for 

humpback whales will be 26. Given that 

2 percent of the humpback whales in 

southeast Alaska are expected to be 

members of the Mexico stock (Wade et 

al., 2016), 1 take is assumed to be from 

the Mexico stock and 25 takes from the 

Hawaii stock. 

The largest Level A harassment zone 

for humpback whales extends 4,050-m 

from the noise source (table 6). All 

construction work will be shut down 

prior to a humpback whale entering the 

Level A harassment zone specific to the 

in-water activity underway at the time. 

In consideration of the infrequent 

occurrence of humpback whales in the 

project area and shutdown 

requirements, no take by Level A 

harassment is anticipated or authorized 

for humpback whales. 

Killer Whale 

Killer whales occur in the Lutak Inlet 

year round with higher occurrences in 

the spring. Group sizes of 15 animals are 

expected with 1 group every 20 days 

from mid-March through May and 1 

group every 30 days for the remainder 

of the year (Hart Crowser, Inc. and KPFF 

Consulting Engineers 2016). There are 

three stocks of killer whales that may be 

present in the project area, with the 

following proportions of overall killer 

whale occurrence expected: Alaska 

Residents, 75 percent; West Coast 

Transients, 13 percent; and Northern 

Residents, 12 percent (section 6 of the 

IHA application). The applicant 

estimated these occurrence proportions 

by determining the total number of 

animals in all three stocks and dividing 

that number by the number of animals 

in a given stock. Therefore, with 130 

expected total takes by Level B 

harassment, 103 takes are expected to be 

from the Alaska Resident stock, 19 takes 

are expected from the West Coast 

Transient stock, and 16 takes are 

expected from the Northern Resident 

stock. 

The largest Level A harassment zone 

for killer whales extends 150-m from the 

noise source (table 6). Killer whales are 

generally conspicuous and protected 

species observers (PSOs) are expected to 

detect killer whales and implement a 

shutdown before the animals enter the 

Level A harassment zone. Therefore, 

takes by Level A harassment are not 

anticipated or authorized. 

Harbor Porpoise 

Harbor porpoise are present year 

round in the Lynn Canal and are 

expected to be present in groups of two 

every 30 days at the project site. Haines 

Borough requested a total of 29 takes of 

harbor porpoise for the duration of the 

project. Of the 29 takes it is expected 

that 13 of those takes could be by Level 

A harassment, over 153 days of impact 

installation of 36-in, 42-in, and 55-in 

sheet piles and DTH activities. For 

construction activities that are of short 

duration and the take estimate was 

below the expected group size, the 

expected group size (e.g., two animals) 

was used as a proxy for take 

calculations for those activities. The 

remaining 16 takes are expected to be by 

Level B harassment. 

Harbor porpoises are known to be an 

inconspicuous species and are 

challenging for PSOs to sight, making 

any approach to a specific area 

potentially difficult to detect. The 

largest Level A harassment zone results 

from impact driving of 42-in piles, and 

extends 4,820.5-m from the source for 

high frequency cetaceans (table 6). The 

IHA requires a distance of 200-m as a 

shutdown zone, given the difficulty of 

observing harbor porpoise at greater 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 33 / Friday, February 16, 2024 / Notices 12313 

distances (see Mitigation section). 

Therefore, some take by Level A 

harassment is expected. 

Dall’s Porpoise 

Groups of 4 Dall’s porpoise are 

expected to occur once every 30 days 

during the project (Dahlheim et al., 

2009), resulting in an estimate of 31 

takes by Level B harassment. Although 

no Dall’s porpoise were observed during 

recent monitoring of other projects in 

the area, tour boat operators 

occasionally observe Dall’s porpoise in 

Taiya Inlet (SolsticeAK, 2023). 

Therefore, the applicant has requested 

authorization of take as described above. 

NMFS concurs with this request and 

authorizes the take. 

The largest Level A harassment zone 

for Dall’s porpoise extends 4,820.5-m 

from the source during DTH installation 

of 42-in piles (table 6). Although Haines 

Borough will implement a significantly 

smaller shutdown zone (i.e., 200-m), 

given the low likelihood of occurrence 

of Dall’s porpoises in the area take by 

Level A harassment is not anticipated 

and is not authorized. 

Steller Sea Lion 

Steller sea lions are frequently 

observed in the project area. Group sizes 

vary during seasonal fish runs in the 

area. Groups of 40 animals per day are 

expected from mid-March through May 

when animals frequent the project site, 

including the Taiya point haulout. At 

other times of the year groups of two 

animals per day are expected in the 

project area. 

During the impact installation of 36- 

in and 42-in piles and the DTH 

installation of 42-in piles, groups of 2 

sea lions per day are expected to occur 

within the respective Level A 

harassment zones over 146 days 

associated with these activities. On this 

basis, NMFS authorizes 292 takes of 

Steller sea lions by Level A harassment. 

Given that 1.4 percent of Steller sea 

lions are members of the ESA listed 

western DPS in the project area, 4 of the 

292 takes by Level A harassment will 

likely be western DPS individuals. The 

largest Level A harassment zone for 

Steller sea lions is 150-m (table 6) but 

it may be difficult for PSOs to view 

Steller sea lions at the outer edges of the 

zone and therefore some take by Level 

A harassment is expected. 

Larger harassment zones associated 

with Level B harassment will 

encompass the Taiya point haulout. It is 

expected that groups of 40 Steller sea 

lions per day over 75 days of vibratory 

installation of all pile types, impact 

installation of 36-in and 42-in piles, and 

DTH installation of 42-in piles which 

will equate to 3,000 takes by Level B 

harassment. At other times of the year 

when the Taiya point haulout is not 

used, group size will be two sea lions 

per day. During this period the 

applicant will complete work over 151 

days for vibratory installation of all pile 

types, impact installation of 36-in and 

42-in piles, and DTH installation of 42- 

in piles which will equate to 302 takes 

by Level B harassment. 

Harbor Seal 

Harbor seals are common in the 

project area year round. The applicant 

and NMFS expect groups of 100 animals 

from March through May when animals 

are more frequent feeding at the mouth 

of the Chilkoot River. At other times of 

the year, groups of five animals are 

expected in the project area (SolsticeAK 

2023). 

During impact installation of 36-in, 

42-in, and 55-in sheet piles and DTH 

installation of 42-in piles it is expected 

that one group of five harbor seals every 

10 days will occur. Over 153 days of 

activity, 79 total takes by Level A 

harassment may occur. For construction 

activities that are of short duration and 

the take estimate was below the 

expected group size, the expected group 

size (e.g., five animals) was used as a 

proxy for take calculations for those 

activities. The largest Level A 

harassment zone results from impact 

driving of 42-in piles extends 2,057 m 

from the source for phocids (table 6). 

The IHA requires a 200-m shutdown 

zone, given the difficulty of observing 

harbor seals at greater distances (see 

Mitigation section). Therefore, take by 

Level A harassment is expected. 

Similar to Steller sea lions the larger 

Level B harassment zones will 

encompass the mouth of the Chilkoot 

River where larger aggregations of 

harbor seals are known to occur. It is 

expected that groups of harbor seals of 

100 every 10 days over 75 days of 

vibratory installation of all pile types, 

impact installation of all pile types, and 

DTH installation of 42-in piles, which 

will equate to 750 takes by Level B 

harassment. During other times of the 

year the applicant expects groups of five 

animals every 10 days over a 151 day 

period for vibratory installation of all 

pile types, impact installation of 36-in 

and 42-in piles, and DTH installation of 

42-in piles. This will result in 827 takes 

by Level B harassment. 

TABLE 7—ESTIMATED TAKE BY LEVEL A AND LEVEL B HARASSMENT, BY SPECIES AND STOCK

Common name Stock Stock 

abundance a Level A Level B Total take Take as a 

percentage 

Humpback Whale ................ Mexico ................................ Unknown 0 1 1 N/A 

Hawaii ................................. 11,278 0 25 25 0.2 

Killer Whale ......................... Alaska Resident ................. 1,920 0 103 103 5.4 

West Coast Transients ....... 349 0 19 19 5.4 

Eastern North Pacific 

Northern Residents.

302 0 16 16 5.3 

Harbor Porpoise .................. Northern Southeast Alaska 1,619 13 16 29 1.8 

Dall’s Porpoise .................... Alaska ................................. UKN 0 31 31 N/A 

Steller sea lion .................... Western DPS ..................... 52,932 4 33 37 <0.1 

Eastern DPS ...................... 43,201 288 2,319 2,607 6.0 

Harbor Seal ......................... Lynn Canal/Stephens Passage.13,388 79 827 906 6.8 

aStock or DPS size is best estimate of population size (Nbest) according to NMFS 2022 Final Stock Assessment Reports. 

Mitigation 

In order to issue an IHA under section 

101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA, NMFS must 

set forth the permissible methods of 

taking pursuant to the activity, and 

other means of effecting the least 

practicable impact on the species or 

stock and its habitat, paying particular 

attention to rookeries, mating grounds, 

and areas of similar significance. NMFS 

regulations require applicants for 

incidental take authorizations to include 

information about the availability and 

feasibility (economic and technological) 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
12314 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 33 / Friday, February 16, 2024 / Notices 

of equipment, methods, and manner of 

conducting the activity or other means 

of effecting the least practicable adverse 

impact upon the affected species or 

stocks, and their habitat (50 CFR 

216.104(a)(11)). 

In evaluating how mitigation may or 

may not be appropriate to ensure the 

least practicable adverse impact on 

species or stocks and their habitat, as 

well as subsistence uses where 

applicable, NMFS considers two 

primary factors: 

(1) The manner in which, and the 

degree to which, the successful 

implementation of the measure(s) is 

expected to reduce impacts to marine 

mammals, marine mammal species or 

stocks, and their habitat. This considers 

the nature of the potential adverse 

impact being mitigated (likelihood, 

scope, range). It further considers the 

likelihood that the measure will be 

effective if implemented (probability of 

accomplishing the mitigating result if 

implemented as planned), the 

likelihood of effective implementation 

(probability implemented as planned); 

and 

(2) The practicability of the measures 

for applicant implementation, which 

may consider such things as cost, and 

impact on operations. 

The following measures will apply to 

Haines Borough’s mitigation 

requirements: 

Implementation of Shutdown Zones— 

For all pile driving/removal activities, 

Haines Borough will implement 

shutdowns within designated zones. 

The purpose of a shutdown zone is 

generally to define an area within which 

shutdown of activity will occur upon 

sighting of a marine mammal (or in 

anticipation of an animal entering the 

defined area). Implementation of 

shutdowns will be used to avoid or 

minimize incidental Level A harassment 

takes from vibratory, impact, and DTH 

pile removal and installation (table 8). 

For all pile driving/removal activities, a 

minimum 10-m shutdown zone must be 

established. NMFS has recommended 

shutdown zones of 200-m for highfrequency cetaceans and phocids, 

despite significantly larger estimated 

Level A harassment zones, in order to 

prescribe implementation of a zone that 

may be reasonably observed under 

typical conditions for these cryptic 

species. It is reasonable to expect that 

these species will be difficult to detect 

from distances further than 200-m by 

PSOs (table 8). All other shutdown 

zones for pile driving and removal 

activities are based on the Level A 

harassment zones and therefore vary by 

pile size and marine mammal hearing 

group (table 6). The placement of PSOs 

during all pile driving activities 

(described in detail in the Monitoring 

and Reporting section) will ensure the 

full extent of shutdown zones are visible 

to PSOs. 

TABLE 8—SHUTDOWN ZONES DURING PILE INSTALLATION AND REMOVAL

Activity Pile size Minutes or strikes per 

pile 

Piles per 

day 

Shutdown zones (m) 

LF 

cetaceans 

MF 

cetaceans 

HF 

cetaceans Phocids Otariids 

Vibratory Removal ....... 16-in ............................. 45 min .......................... 4 15 10 30 10 10 

24-in ............................. 45 min .......................... 1 10 

36-in (temporary) ......... 15 min .......................... 4 15 10 30 10 10 

Vibratory Installation .... 36-in (temporary) ......... 15 min .......................... 4 15 10 30 10 10 

42-in ............................. 45 min .......................... 4 60 10 85 35 10 

55-in sheet pile ............ 30 min .......................... 6 20 10 25 10 10 

Impact Installation ........ 36-in (temporary) ......... 900 strikes .................... 4 2,735 110 200 200 110 

42-in ............................. 1,500 strikes ................. 4 3,845 150 150 

55-in sheet pile ............ 900 strikes .................... 6 1,940 70 80 

DTH drilling .................. 42-in ............................. 300 min/324,000 strikes 2 4,050 145 160 

Establishment of Monitoring Zones— 

Haines Borough has identified 

monitoring zones correlated with the 

larger of the Level B harassment or 

Level A harassment zones. Monitoring 

zones provide utility for observing by 

establishing monitoring protocols for 

areas adjacent to the shutdown zones. In 

some cases the calculated monitoring 

zones are smaller than the Level A 

shutdown zones as presented in table 8. 

This is due to the project area being 

bounded by land to 7,000-m on the 

western most shore of the inlet and 

5,820-m on the eastern shore. 

Monitoring zones enable observers to be 

aware of and communicate the presence 

of marine mammals in the project area 

outside the shutdown zone and thus 

prepare for a potential cessation of 

activity should the animal enter the 

shutdown zone. PSOs will monitor the 

entire visible area to maintain the best 

sense of where animals are moving 

relative to the zone boundaries defined 

in tables 8 and 9. Placement of PSOs on 

the shorelines around Lutak Inlet allow 

PSOs to observe marine mammals 

within and near the inlet. The applicant 

may also voluntarily place a PSO on a 

skiff in Taiya Inlet if safe conditions 

allow for such activity. 

TABLE 9—MARINE MAMMAL

MONITORING ZONE

Activity 

Monitoring 

zone 

(m) 

Vibratory removal of 16-in 

and 24-in piles .................. 5,425 

Vibratory installation and removal of 36-in temporary 

piles ................................... 7,000 

Vibratory installation of 42-in 

piles ................................... 7,000 

Vibratory installation of 55-in 

sheet piles ......................... 6,310 

Impact installation of 36-in 

temporary piles ................. * 1,360 

TABLE 9—MARINE MAMMAL

MONITORING ZONE—Continued 

Activity 

Monitoring 

zone 

(m) 

Impact installation of 42-in 

piles ................................... * 1,360 

Impact installation of 55-in 

sheet piles ......................... 1,000 

DTH installation of 42-in 

piles ................................... 7,000 

* Where Level A shutdown zones are larger 

than the Level B harassment zones. 

Soft Start—The use of soft-start 

procedures are believed to provide 

additional protection to marine 

mammals by providing warning and/or 

giving marine mammals a chance to 

leave the area prior to the hammer 

operating at full capacity. For impact 

pile driving, contractors will be required 

to provide an initial set of strikes from 

the hammer at reduced energy, with 

each strike followed by a 30-second 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 33 / Friday, February 16, 2024 / Notices 12315 

waiting period. This procedure will be 

conducted a total of three times before 

impact pile driving begins. Soft start 

will be implemented at the start of each 

day’s impact pile driving and at any 

time following cessation of impact pile 

driving for a period of 30-minutes or 

longer. Soft start is not required during 

vibratory pile driving and removal 

activities. 

Pre-Activity Monitoring—Prior to the 

start of daily in-water construction 

activity, or whenever a break in pile 

driving/removal of 30-minutes or longer 

occurs, PSOs will observe the shutdown 

and monitoring zones for a period of 30- 

minutes. The shutdown zone will be 

considered cleared when a marine 

mammal has not been observed within 

the zone for that 30-minute period. If a 

marine mammal is observed within the 

shutdown zone, a soft-start cannot 

proceed until the animal has left the 

zone or has not been observed for 15- 

minutes. If the monitoring zone has 

been observed for 30-minutes and 

marine mammals are not present within 

the zone, soft-start procedures can 

commence and work can continue even 

if visibility becomes impaired within 

the monitoring zone. When a marine 

mammal permitted for take by Level B 

harassment is present in the Level B 

harassment zone, activities may begin. 

No work may begin unless the entire 

shutdown zone is visible to the PSOs. If 

work ceases for more than 30-minutes, 

the pre-activity monitoring of both the 

monitoring zone and shutdown zone 

will commence. 

Based on our evaluation of the 

applicant’s measures, NMFS has 

determined that the mitigation measures 

provide the means of effecting the least 

practicable impact on the affected 

species or stocks and their habitat, 

paying particular attention to rookeries, 

mating grounds, and areas of similar 

significance. 

Monitoring and Reporting 

In order to issue an IHA for an 

activity, section 101(a)(5)(D) of the 

MMPA states that NMFS must set forth 

requirements pertaining to the 

monitoring and reporting of such taking. 

The MMPA implementing regulations at 

50 CFR 216.104(a)(13) indicate that 

requests for authorizations must include 

the suggested means of accomplishing 

the necessary monitoring and reporting 

that will result in increased knowledge 

of the species and of the level of taking 

or impacts on populations of marine 

mammals that are expected to be 

present while conducting the activities. 

Effective reporting is critical both to 

compliance as well as ensuring that the 

most value is obtained from the required 

monitoring. 

Monitoring and reporting 

requirements prescribed by NMFS 

should contribute to improved 

understanding of one or more of the 

following: 

• Occurrence of marine mammal 

species or stocks in the area in which 

take is anticipated (e.g., presence, 

abundance, distribution, density); 

• Nature, scope, or context of likely 

marine mammal exposure to potential 

stressors/impacts (individual or 

cumulative, acute or chronic), through 

better understanding of: (1) action or 

environment (e.g., source 

characterization, propagation, ambient 

noise); (2) affected species (e.g., life 

history, dive patterns); (3) co-occurrence 

of marine mammal species with the 

activity; or (4) biological or behavioral 

context of exposure (e.g., age, calving or 

feeding areas); 

• Individual marine mammal 

responses (behavioral or physiological) 

to acoustic stressors (acute, chronic, or 

cumulative), other stressors, or 

cumulative impacts from multiple 

stressors; 

• How anticipated responses to 

stressors impact either: (1) long-term 

fitness and survival of individual 

marine mammals; or (2) populations, 

species, or stocks; 

• Effects on marine mammal habitat 

(e.g., marine mammal prey species, 

acoustic habitat, or other important 

physical components of marine 

mammal habitat); and 

• Mitigation and monitoring 

effectiveness. 

Visual Monitoring 

Monitoring shall be conducted by 

NMFS-approved observers in 

accordance with the monitoring plan 

(appendix C of the IHA application) and 

section 5 of the IHA. Trained observers 

shall be placed from the best vantage 

point(s) practicable to monitor for 

marine mammals and implement 

shutdown or delay procedures when 

applicable through communication with 

the equipment operator. Observer 

training must be provided prior to 

project start, and shall include 

instruction on species identification 

(sufficient to distinguish the species in 

the project area), description and 

categorization of observed behaviors 

and interpretation of behaviors that may 

be construed as being reactions to the 

specified activity, proper completion of 

data forms, and other basic components 

of biological monitoring, including 

tracking of observed animals or groups 

of animals such that repeat sound 

exposures may be attributed to 

individuals (to the extent possible). 

Monitoring will be conducted 30- 

minutes before, during, and 30-minutes 

after pile driving/removal activities. In 

addition, observers shall record all 

incidents of marine mammal 

occurrence, regardless of distance from 

activity, and shall document any 

behavioral reactions in concert with 

distance from piles being driven or 

removed. Pile driving/removal activities 

include the time to install or remove a 

single pile or series of piles, as long as 

the time elapsed between uses of the 

pile driving equipment is no more than 

30-minutes. 

A minimum of one PSO will be on 

duty during all barge movements and 

other in-water construction activities 

and a minimum of three PSOs during all 

pile driving activities. Locations from 

which PSOs will be able to monitor for 

marine mammals are readily available 

from publicly accessible shore side 

areas at the project site, Lutak Road at 

a beach across from Takshanuk 

Mountain trail, and along the shoreline 

just south of Tanani Point along Lutak 

Road. PSOs will monitor for marine 

mammals entering the harassment 

zones. 

PSOs will scan the waters using 

binoculars and will use a handheld 

range-finder device to verify the 

distance to each sighting from the 

project site. All PSOs will be trained in 

marine mammal identification and 

behaviors and are required to have no 

other project-related tasks while 

conducting monitoring. In addition, 

monitoring will be conducted by 

qualified observers, who will be placed 

at the best vantage point(s) practicable 

to monitor for marine mammals and 

implement shutdown/delay procedures 

when applicable by calling for the 

shutdown to the hammer operator via a 

radio. Haines Borough will adhere to the 

following observer qualifications: 

(i) PSOs must be independent of the 

activity contractor (for example, 

employed by a subcontractor) and have 

no other assigned tasks during 

monitoring periods; 

(ii) One PSO will be designated as the 

lead PSO or monitoring coordinator and 

that observer must have prior 

experience working as an observer; 

(iii) Other observers may substitute 

education (degree in biological science 

or related field) or training for 

experience; and 

(iv) Haines Borough must submit 

observer Curriculum Vitaes for approval 

by NMFS. 

Additional recommended observer 

qualifications include: 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
12316 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 33 / Friday, February 16, 2024 / Notices 

• Ability to conduct field 

observations and collect data according 

to assigned protocols; 

• Experience or training in the field 

identification of marine mammals, 

including the identification of 

behaviors; 

• Sufficient training, orientation, or 

experience with the construction 

operation to provide for personal safety 

during observations; 

• Writing skills sufficient to prepare a 

report of observations including but not 

limited to the number and species of 

marine mammals observed; dates and 

times when in-water construction 

activities were conducted; dates and 

times when in-water construction 

activities were suspended to avoid 

potential incidental injury from 

construction sound of marine mammals 

observed within a defined shutdown 

zone; and marine mammal behavior; 

and 

• Ability to communicate orally, by 

radio or in person, with project 

personnel to provide real-time 

information on marine mammals 

observed in the area as necessary. 

Reporting 

A draft marine mammal monitoring 

report will be submitted to NMFS 

within 90 days after the completion of 

pile driving and removal activities. It 

will include an overall description of 

work completed, a narrative regarding 

marine mammal sightings, and 

associated PSO data sheets. Specifically, 

the report must include: 

• Dates and times (begin and end) of 

all marine mammal monitoring; 

• Construction activities occurring 

during each daily observation period, 

including the number and type of piles 

driven or removed and by what method 

(i.e., impact driving) and for each pile or 

total number of strikes for each pile 

(impact driving); 

• PSO locations during marine 

mammal monitoring; 

• Environmental conditions during 

monitoring periods (at beginning and 

end of PSO shift and whenever 

conditions change significantly), 

including Beaufort sea state and any 

other relevant weather conditions 

including cloud cover, fog, sun glare, 

and overall visibility to the horizon, and 

estimated observable distance; 

• Upon observation of a marine 

mammal, the following information: 

Name of PSO who sighted the animal(s) 

and PSO location and activity at time of 

sighting; time of sighting; identification 

of the animal(s) (e.g., genus/species, 

lowest possible taxonomic level, or 

unidentified), PSO confidence in 

identification, and the composition of 

the group if there is a mix of species; 

distance and bearing of each marine 

mammal observed relative to the pile 

being driven for each sighting (if pile 

driving was occurring at time of 

sighting); estimated number of animals 

(min/max/best estimate); estimated 

number of animals by cohort (adults, 

juveniles, neonates, group composition, 

etc.); animal’s closest point of approach 

and estimated time spent within the 

harassment zone; and description of any 

marine mammal behavioral observations 

(e.g., observed behaviors such as feeding 

or traveling), including an assessment of 

behavioral responses thought to have 

resulted from the activity (e.g., no 

response or changes in behavioral state 

such as ceasing feeding, changing 

direction, flushing, or breaching); 

• Number of marine mammals 

detected within the harassment zones, 

by species; and 

• Detailed information about any 

implementation of any mitigation 

triggered (e.g., shutdowns and delays), a 

description of specific actions that 

ensued, and resulting changes in 

behavior of the animal(s), if any. 

If no comments are received from 

NMFS within 30 days, the draft final 

report will constitute the final report. If 

comments are received, a final report 

addressing NMFS comments must be 

submitted within 30 days after receipt of 

comments. 

Reporting Injured or Dead Marine 

Mammals 

In the unanticipated event that the 

specified activity clearly causes the take 

of a marine mammal in a manner 

prohibited by the IHA (if issued), such 

as an injury, serious injury or mortality, 

Haines Borough will immediately cease 

the specified activities and report the 

incident to the Office of Protected 

Resources, NMFS, and the Alaska 

Regional Stranding Coordinator. The 

report will include the following 

information: 

• Description of the incident; 

• Environmental conditions (e.g., 

Beaufort sea state, visibility); 

• Description of all marine mammal 

observations in the 24 hours preceding 

the incident; 

• Species identification or 

description of the animal(s) involved; 

• Fate of the animal(s); and 

• Photographs or video footage of the 

animal(s) (if equipment is available). 

Activities will not resume until NMFS 

is able to review the circumstances of 

the prohibited take. NMFS will work 

with Haines Borough to determine what 

is necessary to minimize the likelihood 

of further prohibited take and ensure 

MMPA compliance. Haines Borough 

will not be able to resume their 

activities until notified by NMFS. 

In the event that Haines Borough 

discovers an injured or dead marine 

mammal, and the lead PSO determines 

that the cause of the injury or death is 

unknown and the death is relatively 

recent (e.g., in less than a moderate state 

of decomposition as described in the 

next paragraph), Haines Borough will 

immediately report the incident to the 

Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, 

and the NMFS Alaska Stranding Hotline 

and/or by email to the Alaska Regional 

Stranding Coordinator. The report will 

include the same information identified 

in the paragraph above. Activities will 

be able to continue while NMFS reviews 

the circumstances of the incident. 

NMFS will work with Haines Borough 

to determine whether modifications in 

the activities are appropriate. 

In the event that Haines Borough 

discovers an injured or dead marine 

mammal and the lead PSO determines 

that the injury or death is not associated 

with or related to the activities 

authorized in the IHA (e.g., previously 

wounded animal, carcass with moderate 

to advanced decomposition, or 

scavenger damage), Haines Borough will 

report the incident to the Office of 

Protected Resources, NMFS, and the 

NMFS Alaska Stranding Hotline and/or 

by email to the Alaska Regional 

Stranding Coordinator, within 24 hours 

of the discovery. Haines Borough will 

provide photographs, video footage (if 

available), or other documentation of 

the stranded animal sighting to NMFS 

and the Marine Mammal Stranding 

Network. 

Negligible Impact Analysis and 

Determination 

NMFS has defined negligible impact 

as an impact resulting from the 

specified activity that cannot be 

reasonably expected to, and is not 

reasonably likely to, adversely affect the 

species or stock through effects on 

annual rates of recruitment or survival 

(50 CFR 216.103). A negligible impact 

finding is based on the lack of likely 

adverse effects on annual rates of 

recruitment or survival (i.e., populationlevel effects). An estimate of the number 

of takes alone is not enough information 

on which to base an impact 

determination. In addition to 

considering estimates of the number of 

marine mammals that might be ‘‘taken’’ 

through harassment, NMFS considers 

other factors, such as the likely nature 

of any impacts or responses (e.g., 

intensity, duration), the context of any 

impacts or responses (e.g., critical 

reproductive time or location, foraging 

impacts affecting energetics), as well as 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 33 / Friday, February 16, 2024 / Notices 12317 

effects on habitat, and the likely 

effectiveness of the mitigation. We also 

assess the number, intensity, and 

context of estimated takes by evaluating 

this information relative to population 

status. Consistent with the 1989 

preamble for NMFS’ implementing 

regulations (54 FR 40338, September 29, 

1989), the impacts from other past and 

ongoing anthropogenic activities are 

incorporated into this analysis via their 

impacts on the baseline (e.g., as 

reflected in the regulatory status of the 

species, population size and growth rate 

where known, ongoing sources of 

human-caused mortality, or ambient 

noise levels). 

To avoid repetition, the majority of 

our analysis applies to all the species 

listed in table 7, given that many of the 

anticipated effects of this project on 

different marine mammal stocks are 

expected to be relatively similar in 

nature. Where there are meaningful 

differences between species or stocks, or 

groups of species, in anticipated 

individual responses to activities, 

impact of expected take on the 

population due to differences in 

population status, or impacts on habitat, 

they are described independently in the 

analysis below. 

Pile driving and removal activities 

associated with the project as outlined 

previously, have the potential to disturb 

or displace marine mammals. 

Specifically, the specified activities may 

result in take, in the form of Level A 

harassment and Level B harassment 

from underwater sounds generated from 

pile driving and removal. Potential takes 

could occur if individuals of these 

species are present in zones ensonified 

above the thresholds for Level A or 

Level B harassment identified above 

when these activities are underway. 

Take by Level A and Level B 

harassment will be due to potential 

behavioral disturbance, TTS, and PTS. 

No serious injury or mortality is 

anticipated or authorized given the 

nature of the activity and measures 

designed to minimize the possibility of 

injury to marine mammals. Take by 

Level A harassment is only anticipated 

for harbor porpoise, Steller sea lions, 

and harbor seal. Take by Level A 

harassment of the ESA-listed western 

DPS of Steller sea lions is expected to 

be a very small portion of the overall 

DPS (<0.1 percent). Impacts to affected 

individuals of the western DPS are not 

expected to result in population-level 

impacts. The potential for harassment is 

minimized through the construction 

method (i.e., use of direct pull removal 

or vibratory methods to the extent 

practical) and the implementation of the 

planned mitigation measures (see 

Mitigation section). 

In addition to the expected effects 

resulting from Level B harassment, we 

anticipate that harbor porpoises, Steller 

sea lions, and harbor seals may sustain 

some limited Level A harassment in the 

form of auditory injury. However, 

animals in these locations that 

experience PTS will likely only receive 

slight PTS, i.e., minor degradation of 

hearing capabilities within regions of 

hearing that align most completely with 

the energy produced by pile driving, 

i.e., the low-frequency region below 2 

kHz, not severe hearing impairment or 

impairment in the regions of greatest 

hearing sensitivity. If hearing 

impairment occurs, it is most likely that 

the affected animal will lose a few 

decibels in its hearing sensitivity, which 

in most cases is not likely to 

meaningfully affect its ability to forage 

and communicate with conspecifics. As 

described above, we expect that marine 

mammals will be likely to move away 

from a sound source that represents an 

aversive stimulus, especially at levels 

that will be expected to result in PTS, 

given sufficient notice through use of 

soft start. 

The project also is not expected to 

have significant adverse effects on 

affected marine mammals’ habitat. The 

project activities will not modify 

existing marine mammal habitat for a 

significant amount of time. The 

activities may cause some fish or 

invertebrates to leave the area of 

disturbance, thus temporarily impacting 

marine mammals’ foraging 

opportunities in a limited portion of the 

foraging range; but, because of the short 

duration of the activities, the relatively 

small area of the habitat that may be 

affected, and the availability of nearby 

habitat of similar or higher value, the 

impacts to marine mammal habitat are 

not expected to cause significant or 

long-term negative consequences. The 

haulout location at Taiya Point will be 

affected by the project for foraging 

Steller sea lions and occasionally harbor 

seals. Currently, the Taiya Point haulout 

location is not known to be a pupping 

location for Steller sea lions or harbor 

seals but are important areas throughout 

the year. Steller sea lions and to a lesser 

extent harbor seals at this haulout will 

likely result in repeated exposure of the 

same animals. Repeated exposures of 

individuals to this pile driving activity 

could cause Level A and Level B 

harassment but are unlikely to 

considerably disrupt foraging behavior 

or result in significant decrease in 

fitness, reproduction, or survival for the 

affected individuals. 

In summary and as described above, 

the following factors support our 

determination that the impacts resulting 

from this activity are not expected to 

adversely affect any of the species or 

stocks through effects on annual rates of 

recruitment or survival: 

• No serious injury or mortality is 

anticipated or authorized; 

• Any Level A harassment exposures 

(i.e., to harbor seals, harbor porpoise, 

and Steller sea lions, only) are 

anticipated to result in slight PTS (i.e., 

of a few decibels), within the lower 

frequencies associated with pile driving; 

• The anticipated incidents of Level B 

harassment would consist of, at worst, 

temporary modifications in behavior 

that will not result in fitness impacts to 

individuals; 

• The ensonifed areas from the 

project are very small relative to the 

overall habitat ranges of all species and 

stocks; 

• The lack of anticipated significant 

or long-term negative effects to marine 

mammal habitat or any other areas of 

known biological importance; with the 

exception of the haulout location at 

Taiya Point; and 

• The mitigation measures are 

expected to reduce the effects of the 

specified activity to the level of least 

practicable adverse impact. 

Based on the analysis contained 

herein of the likely effects of the 

specified activity on marine mammals 

and their habitat, and taking into 

consideration the implementation of the 

monitoring and mitigation measures, 

NMFS finds that the total marine 

mammal take from the activity will have 

a negligible impact on all affected 

marine mammal species or stocks. 

Small Numbers 

As noted previously, only take of 

small numbers of marine mammals may 

be authorized under sections 

101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA for 

specified activities other than military 

readiness activities. The MMPA does 

not define small numbers and so, in 

practice, where estimated numbers are 

available, NMFS compares the number 

of individuals taken to the most 

appropriate estimation of abundance of 

the relevant species or stock in our 

determination of whether an 

authorization is limited to small 

numbers of marine mammals. When the 

predicted number of individuals to be 

taken is fewer than one-third of the 

species or stock abundance, the take is 

considered to be of small numbers. 

Additionally, other qualitative factors 

may be considered in the analysis, such 

as the temporal or spatial scale of the 

activities. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
12318 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 33 / Friday, February 16, 2024 / Notices 

Table 7 demonstrates the number of 

animals that could be exposed to the 

received noise levels that could cause 

harassment for the work in Lutak Inlet. 

Our analysis shows that less than 6.8 

percent of each affected stock could be 

taken by harassment. The numbers of 

animals to be taken for these stocks will 

be considered small relative to the 

relevant stock’s abundances, even if 

each estimated taking occurred to a new 

individual—an extremely unlikely 

scenario. 

Based on the analysis contained 

herein of the activity (including the 

mitigation and monitoring measures) 

and the anticipated take of marine 

mammals, NMFS finds that small 

numbers of marine mammals will be 

taken relative to the population size of 

the affected species or stocks. 

Unmitigable Adverse Impact Analysis 

and Determination 

In order to issue an IHA, NMFS must 

find that the specified activity will not 

have an ‘‘unmitigable adverse impact’’ 

on the subsistence uses of the affected 

marine mammal species or stocks by 

Alaskan Natives. NMFS has defined 

‘‘unmitigable adverse impact’’ in 50 CFR 

216.103 as an impact resulting from the 

specified activity: (1) That is likely to 

reduce the availability of the species to 

a level insufficient for a harvest to meet 

subsistence needs by (i) causing the 

marine mammals to abandon or avoid 

hunting areas, (ii) directly displacing 

subsistence users; or (iii) placing 

physical barriers between the marine 

mammals and the subsistence hunters; 

and (2) that cannot be sufficiently 

mitigated by other measures to increase 

the availability of marine mammals to 

allow subsistence needs to be met. 

In the Haines area sea lions and 

harbor seals are available for subsistence 

harvest under the MMPA. Limited 

subsistence harvests of marine 

mammals near the community of Haines 

has occurred in the past, with the most 

recent recorded/documented harvests of 

marine mammals in Haines in 2012 and 

in nearby Klukwan in 2014. The activity 

will take place in Lutak Inlet, and no 

activities overlap with current 

subsistence hunting areas; therefore, 

there are no relevant subsistence uses of 

marine mammals adversely impacted by 

this action. The project is not likely to 

adversely impact the availability of any 

marine mammal species or stocks that 

are commonly used for subsistence 

purposes or to impact subsistence 

harvest of marine mammals in the 

region. 

Based on the description of the 

specified activity, the measures 

described to minimize adverse effects 

on the availability of marine mammals 

for subsistence purposes, and the 

mitigation and monitoring measures, 

NMFS has determined that there will 

not be an unmitigable adverse impact on 

subsistence uses from Haines Borough’s 

activities. 

Endangered Species Act 

There are two marine mammal 

species (Mexico DPS humpback whale 

and western DPS Steller sea lion) that 

NMFS is authorizing take in the project 

area that are listed as threatened and 

endangered under the ESA. The NMFS 

Alaska Regional Office issued a 

Biological Opinion under section 7 of 

the ESA, on the issuance of an IHA to 

Haines Borough under section 

101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA by the NMFS 

Permits and Conservation Division. The 

Biological Opinion concluded that the 

action is not likely to jeopardize the 

continued existence of western DPS 

Steller sea lions, and is not likely to 

destroy or adversely modify Mexico 

DPS humpback whale and western DPS 

Steller sea lion critical habitats. 

National Environmental Policy Act 

To comply with the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

(NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and 

NOAA Administrative Order (NAO) 

216–6A, NMFS must evaluate our 

proposed action (i.e., the issuance of an 

IHA) and alternatives with respect to 

potential impacts on the human 

environment. 

This action is consistent with 

categories of activities identified in 

Categorical Exclusion B4 (IHAs with no 

anticipated serious injury or mortality) 

of the Companion Manual for NAO 216– 

6A, which do not individually or 

cumulatively have the potential for 

significant impacts on the quality of the 

human environment and for which we 

have not identified any extraordinary 

circumstances that would preclude this 

categorical exclusion. Accordingly, 

NMFS has determined that the issuance 

of this IHA qualifies to be categorically 

excluded from further NEPA review. 

Authorization 

NMFS has issued an IHA to Haines 

Borough for the potential harassment of 

small numbers of six marine mammal 

species incidental to the Lutak Dock 

replacement project in Haines, AK, that 

includes the previously explained 

mitigation, monitoring and reporting 

requirements. 

Dated: February 12, 2024. 

Kimberly Damon-Randall, 

Director, Office of Protected Resources, 

National Marine Fisheries Service. 

[FR Doc. 2024–03251 Filed 2–15–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

[RTID 0648–XD731] 

Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management 

Council (MAFMC) and New England 

Fishery Management Council 

(NEFMC); Joint Public Meeting 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Notice; public meeting. 

SUMMARY: The MAFMC and NEFMC 

will jointly hold a public meeting 

(webinar) of the Spiny Dogfish and 

Monkfish Advisory Panels to review 

potential sturgeon bycatch reduction 

measures. See SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATION for agenda details. 

DATES: The meeting will be held on 

Tuesday, March 5, 2024, from 1 p.m. to 

5 p.m. 

ADDRESSES: Webinar connection 

information will be posted to the 

MAFMC’s website calendar prior to the 

meeting at www.mafmc.org. 

Council address: Mid-Atlantic Fishery 

Management Council, 800 N State 

Street, Suite 201, Dover, DE 19901; 

telephone: (302) 674–2331; 

www.mafmc.org. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Christopher M. Moore, Ph.D., Executive 

Director, Mid-Atlantic Fishery 

Management Council, telephone: (302) 

526–5255. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Councils’ Monkfish and Spiny Dogfish 

Advisory Panels will meet jointly to 

discuss: The range of sturgeon bycatch 

reduction alternatives; the draft impact 

analyses for the alternatives; 

recommendations for the Councils and 

their Spiny Dogfish and Monkfish 

Committees; and other business, as 

necessary. 

Special Accommodations 

The meeting is physically accessible 

to people with disabilities. Requests for 

sign language interpretation or other 

auxiliary aid should be directed to 

Shelley Spedden, (302) 526–5251, at 

least 5 days prior to the meeting date. 

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1